- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2014 10:02:26 -0700
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 1 July 2014 23:22, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> wrote: > Martin opened two similar issues: > <https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/7> > <https://github.com/httpwg/http-extensions/issues/8> > > ... regarding how to handle multiple advertised alternative services. > > Personally, I'm not sure we need to specify this (see my comments in the issues). > > What do others think? Martin, any further thoughts? I think that we probably need to have text to clarify what each means, but it should be relatively simple: In both cases, I think that we can say that each advertisement of an alternative service adds a new alternative to the set of alternatives that is known to the client/recipient. Then, when multiple alternatives are present, we let the client choose the alternative it likes best. Existing alternatives can have properties altered by selecting based on the tuple [protocol, host, port] and providing new values for other attributes. Here I'm thinking that we enable forcibly expiring an alternative by adjusting max-age. I'm happy to provide a PR (or three) to this effect.
Received on Wednesday, 2 July 2014 17:02:54 UTC